aarushi 🍉

bisexuals sitting:

The literary Sherlock Holmes was an autistic coded character before people knew what autism was.

The literary Sherlock Holmes was an explicitly aromantic character before people had a word for that.

Literary Holmes solved mysteries not merely for the intellectual stimulation but also out of a genuine desire to do good. He cared deeply about every client. HE WAS NOT A HIGH-FUNCTIONING SOCIOPATH! He could definitely be insensitive and blunt but he was not callous or unfeeling.

Literary Sherlock threatened to beat a guy who was being creepy with his own stepdaughter.

Literary Sherlock learned to grow past his misogyny after a woman outsmarted him.

In particular, he was always respectful to Mrs Hudson, never belittling or talking down to her (the otherwise enjoyable Guy Ritchie films screw this up too). In fact, they got along so well that they were actually a very popular ship back in the day.

Literary Holmes would NEVER call Watson an idiot. He was his only friend who he loved and respected, even if he did get frustrated with him sometimes. He didn’t need to belittle others to feel powerful.

Literary Holmes and Watson broke into a corrupt man’s house and witnessed him being murdered by a woman he was blackmailing. They knew exactly who she was but they let her get away because they were chaotic good like that.

Literary Holmes had HUMILITY: something a smug prig like Steven Moffat will never understand. He could be arrogant but he had a sense of humour and was willing to admit when he was wrong. And he was wrong sometimes because he was a flawed human being, not some gross male power fantasy.

Literary Holmes respected the working class and was often disdainful of the rich. In Victorian England!

Literary Holmes indirectly caused the death of a guy who abused (and implicitly molested) his daughters and he didn’t give a single fuck about it.